That’s a quote from George Orwell’s 1945 novel, “Animal Farm.” I don’t know if many high school students read that these days, but once upon a time (my day, my high school), it was nearly mandatory reading and everyone knew that line.

But does it have to be that way when it comes to the basics of education funding in Wisconsin, where some kids have been defined year after year by the state as more equal than others?

You would think it would be fairly easy to sell people on the idea of taking steps to close the gaps in spending between school districts.

But, wrong again, based on the outcome of this year’s state budget. A plan approved by Republican budget makers and both legislative houses to reduce the disadvantages that low spending ceilings put on some school districts was vetoed by Gov. Scott Walker. The disparities in state-mandated spending limits will remain.

The Walker veto surprised me.

“You and me both,” said state Rep. John Nygren. Nygren is co-chair of the Legislature’s budget-writing committee and he pushed hard to help dozens of school districts that are systematically required to spend less money than others. The list of low-ceiling districts doesn’t break down by income or location or other common dividing lines, but many are small and rural.

The disparities are linked to differences in how much districts were spending in the early 1990s. The differences got locked into place when the state imposed caps for how much per student schools could receive in property taxes and state aid. The caps have changed over the years, but the differences remain.

The disparities run, in some cases, to thousands of dollars per student per year. But even gaps of a few hundred dollars per child add up and offerings and quality are crimped for those with less money.

Can’t something be done about this? Nygren certainly thinks so, and for specific reasons. His district in northeastern Wisconsin includes eight school districts, and he said all eight have revenue caps below the state average.

The disparities are “definitely an issue for the people I represent,” Nygren said. “I’m disappointed. There was an opportunity for us to correct or at least begin to correct a structural problem with the funding formula.”

A modest proposal

The plan that legislative Republicans agreed to wasn’t super dramatic. It raised the lowest permitted amount for a school district’s revenue cap from $9,100 last year to $9,300 this year, and then increased it $100 in each following year until it reached $9,800 in 2022-'23. That would still be below the state average last year of $10,439.

In his veto message, Walker said he was knocking out the plan “because the result is a substantial increase in property tax capacity that school districts may exercise without voter input.”

School leaders in Nygren’s district are concerned. The revenue cap for Marinette schools is $9,352.76 per student. “I see the inequities,” said Wendy Dzurick, superintendent of the 2,200-student district.

The differences in revenue limits weren’t such a big deal when every district had union contracts that, among other things, generally rewarded teachers for staying with the same district for years.

The Act 10 legislation, which basically threw teacher contracts out the window in 2011, changed that. It gave districts more control over their money, which had pluses, especially if you were a district with more money. Some of those districts started using better pay as a lure for good teachers from low-revenue districts.

“Where the rubber meets the road is that these low revenue districts are being out-competed for teachers,” said Dan Rossmiller, director of government relations for the Wisconsin Association of School Boards.

In Marinette’s case, even some nearby districts that are below the state average are doing better. Peshtigo has a revenue lid almost $500 per student higher.

Marinette parents seem aware of what more money can buy. Under the state’s open enrollment law, 210 Marinette children enrolled this year in public schools in other districts, while 27 from elsewhere enrolled in Marinette, according to Brian Walters, Marinette finance director. That drains money from Marinette — and the governor allowed an increase in payments for open enrollment students to stay in the budget, adding incentives for districts to take more open enrollment kids.

Marinette, like every district, will get $200 more per student this year and another $200 next year. That’s good, say Dzurick and Williams, but it doesn’t reduce the revenue limit disparities.

They said they viewed the proposed revenue cap increase as a matter of local control. The Marinette School Board could decide whether to add that much to local property taxes — and, if they did and people didn’t like it, the board could be defeated in the next elections.

Couldn’t Marinette use a referendum to increase school spending? Yes. Increasing numbers of districts have done that. But the new budget increases limits on when a referendum can be held. And Dzurick and Williams suggested a referendum would be a more expensive path for Marinette.

From a statewide perspective, now what?

Well, there’s the next state budget in two years. And the Legislature is creating a task force to study school spending policy overall. Sen. Luther Olsen (R-Ripon) and Rep. Joel Kitchens (R-Sturgeon Bay) will be co-chairs and it will have members from both parties and from outside the Legislature.

Olsen said he wants the task force to look at the full range of questions about how spending levels are set, including spending on voucher and charter school students. The state education finance system is very complicated, he said. But, overall, he said, disparities are worse in some other states. The Wisconsin system “does what it’s supposed to, it’s just not pleasant.”

OK. But it’s especially unpleasant if, year after year, you’re not as equal as other kids.

Alan Borsuk is senior fellow in law and public policy at Marquette Law School. Reach him at alan.borsuk@marquette.edu.